November has seen several important events on the D.C.
League calendar, and the month is only half over! On November 10, a
noontime dialogue organized by our Housing Committee with the
assistance of Anna Marsh took place in the Boardroom of LWVUS at 1730
M St. Some 25 people heard Cheryl Cort of WRN, Nina Dastur, a housing
attorney, and Robert Pohlman, Executive Director of the Coalition for
Nonprofit housing and Economic Development explained the latest
developments in the legislative and zoning initiatives, as well as new
initiatives that are in the works. On November 12 the League forum on
Vouchers took place at The Sumner School. (See report from the Forum.) Next week, by the time this VOTER is mailed (Nov. 21). Our
Units will have met and discussed all the many issues relating to
school vouchers.

Also on November 12, our Voter Service Committee got a
head start on the coming election year, by cooperating with the D.C.
Public Schools and staff members of the Board of Elections to give an
afterschool workshop on voter education and registration to high
school students and their teachers. Each of the participating schools
received a supply of voter registration forms, information as to
location of polling places, and more materials to begin spreading the
word about elections.

On November 13, the Congressional Representation
Committee heard from representatives of three D.C. groups working
toward congressional representation for D.C. as well as local
autonomy: Get the Vote, the Statehood/Green Party, and the Committee
for a Capital City.

Before December and the year 2003 have ended and the
year 2004 begins, I want to thank all of our wonderful members for
their continued support for the League -- moral, and financial. Soon you
will receive the annual letter from your President, once more asking
you to "send money."

Let's all thank Elaine Melmed, for the $598 her
imaginative table game produced for our budget on the occasion of our
annual fall luncheon - it is possible to have fun while giving money.
Your contributions are appreciated. Speaking of fun, we should also
thank Linda Softli, Naomi Glass, and the 38 people who attended the
Hillwood tour on October 5 for helping keep our balance sheet in the
black.

If you have moved since the last election or are a new resident in the District, please note
that the Last Day To Register To Vote in the January 13th Presidential Primary is
MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2003. (See below.)

Four panelists with different perspectives on school
vouchers presented their views November 12 to an appreciative audience
of about 50 League members and guests in The Sumner School. Arnold
Fege, President of Public Advocacy for Kids, pointed out that over 60
national organizations officially oppose vouchers, that only
Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Florida use public funds to support voucher
plans, and that polls show that 80% of the American public value our
public schools. Cornelia Spinner, DC State Education Officer,
acknowledged that the Mayor and some DC Council members favor school
vouchers. There no definitive studies on the impact of vouchers on a
school system or the students; and that imposition of the plan will
"add to the chaos in our city. Warlene Gary, Director of Human
and Civil Rights Division of the National Education Association,
pointed out that race and poor performance are the basis of the
movement -that it contributes to the privatization of our schools- and
that what they actually need for reform is full financial support.
Marnie Shaul, Director of Education Issues for the General Accounting
Office (GAO) said that because of the difficulty in designing valid
studies, there is no definitive research, that the three Milwaukee
studies have produced widely different outcomes. During the question
and answer period, Cornelia Spinner agreed that studies of those DC
students who have used privately funded vouchers show that there is a
high attrition rate. Fege noted that the same accountability is not
required for private schools as that for public schools. Courtney
Snowden of the National Coalition for Public Education clarified the
pending legislation -$7500 each for 1000 to 1300 DC children each
year, much less than Mayor Williams had initially expected. The legal
counsel to Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton urged us to call senators
and congressmen to let them know that majorities of the DC Council,
the School Board, and other organizations in the District oppose
vouchers, despite the support of Mayor Williams, Councilman Chavous,
and School Board President Peggy Cooper Cafritz. — Kathy Schmidt

The Children at Risk Committee is concerned that
proposed legislation --which will soon come before the City Council--
is not in the best interests of children. Proposed measures aim to
punish parents of juvenile offenders with fines and notification of
their arrest to public housing authorities.

These measures also would lower the age at which
juveniles can be tried in adult courts and confined in adult
facilities. Experts in juvenile justice matters are attacking these
proposals. In their place they urge integration of substance abuse,
mental health and educational services for juvenile offenders. They
argue that the number of juvenile offenders could be lowered if city
youth had access to after school programs, vocational training,
mentoring, decent housing, parent involvement in schools. They stress
the impact of poverty on crime and present most delinquents as victims
rather than dangerous and violent criminals.

In March the Children at Risk Committee will prepare
for the units a review of the sorry state of juvenile justice in D.C.
and many other cities across the country. — Joan Wilson (237-6264), Chairs

Monday, December 15th is the last day DC residents can
register to vote in the January 13"' Presidential Preference
Primary for the Democratic and DC Statehood-Green Parties. The
Republican Party will hold a caucus in February 2004. Visit www.dnet.org/dc
for a list of candidates.

We are grateful to the Washingtoniana Division of the
Martin Luther King Memorial Library for keeping LWVDC archives. We are
in the process of making sure these are in a usable form. Although
they have many boxes of material that various Leaguers have submitted,
there is not a concise way to access key documents without going
through several boxes. Therefore, we are compiling a box of a
complete run of the Voters as well as other key documents so that they
are all together.

Don't clean out your basement for us, but if you happen
to have original copies of the following, it would be appreciated. We
need Voters from 1989 (vol. 62, nos.6-16) and anything prior to Jan.
1983 (vol. 57, no. 6). Some are simply missing, and for some, we have
one copy, but would like not to have to do a lot of photocopying. Also
needed are Voters' Guides prior to September 1978 and Where We Stand
prior to 1977.

As the office is small, please do not bring in files.
If you have these particular issues, please contact Chris Matthews at
269-3890 (ChrisMatt@igc.org)
to arrange pickup. If you have an interest or time to devote to this
project, let me know! — Chris Matthews (269-3890), Chair

LWVUS, in conjunction with LWVNCA and LWVDC is
planning to launch a new listserv on DC Voting Rights. LWVUS Board
member Olivia Thorne will assist with the initial moderation of the
listserv.

Save the Dates: June 11-14, 2004 for the 2004 LWVUS
CONVENTION to be held at the Hilton Washington Hotel, Washington, DC.
Volunteers will be needed for these positions during the convention:
Registration, Credentials, Dine-around, Doorkeepers, Elections,
Hospitality, Information, Monitors, Timekeepers, and Ushers. Mark your
calendar now and watch for signup sheets in the DC Voter in early
2004. — Andrea Morris Gruhl & Barbara Sherrill, NCA News
& Notes

Matt Marcou of Get the Vote made a case for a
constitutional amendment to correct this clear civil rights violation,
which would provide for full voting rights as well as local autonomy.
Reviewing the process of developing the constitution, he reminded us
that the amendment process was devised to change the constitution as
needed. In succeeding years, amendments have repeatedly expanded the
rights of citizens to vote. The process of achieving support needed
for a constitutional amendment is not quick or easy. To persuade
Congress and the 50 states to support it, we must first build
agreement and consensus among ourselves.

The Statehood/Green Party,
represented by Scott McLarty, wants full statehood like that of the
current 50 states. Remembering some of our distinguished citizens who
have supported Statehood (Josephine Butler, Julius Hobson, and Hilda
Mason), he said Home Rule has changed our circumstances, but not
enough. Statehood would be permanent, and allow us to develop a
democratic state. Representation alone is not democracy, and it should
come from democracy, not precede it. There was a question from a
member of the Committee about our fiscal ability to maintain a viable
state under statehood, which still needs to be answered.

The Committee
for a Capital City, represented by Rick Dykema, advocates reunion with
Maryland. Washington, D.C. would become a Congressional district and
vote with other Maryland citizens. One problem, though, is that the
consent of Maryland is required for such a solution, and Maryland
opposes retrocession. Dykema also acknowledged that we would lose at
least two of our electoral votes, and might after the 2010 census be
redistricted with parts of Maryland.

You are invited to attend the next meeting of the
Congressional Representation Committee on December 11, at 2:30 p.m.,
in the Cleveland Park Library, Connecticut Avenue and Newark St. NW.
Speakers from other D.C. groups with different perspectives will be
announced in our weekly electronic news "This Week in the
League." For more information, call Kathy Schmidt. — Kathy Schmidt (237-5550) Chair

Election of the President/Presidential Selection: The
League has had a position in favor of direct election of the President
and abolition of the Electoral College since 1970. The position is
being updated this year by a LWVUS Task Force, which recommends adding
two sentences to the existing position. The new position will be the
subject of our concurrence Unit Meetings in February, when we will
discuss what the position means and whether we support it. The text of
the proposed new position follows, with added sentences in italics:

"The League of Women Voters believes that the direct-popular-vote
method for electing the President and Vice President is essential to
representative government. The League of Women Voters believes,
therefore, that the Electoral College should be abolished. The League
also supports uniform voting qualifications and procedures for
presidential elections. The League supports changes in the
presidential election system - from the candidate selection process to
the general election - to provide voters with sufficient information
about candidates and their positions, public policy issues and the
selection process itself. The League supports action to ensure that
the media, political parties, candidates, and all levels of government
achieve these goals and provide that information."

Looking ahead to January, save the 15th from noon to
2:00 pm for a General Meeting on The Electoral College and its
Alternatives, when we
will discuss some of the problems associated with this
poorly understood structure of our constitution. Benjamin Wilson,
Chair of the DC Board of Elections and Ethics, has agreed to moderate
our panel.

Human Rights Day December 10: The LWVDC will have a
table at the luncheon sponsored by the United Nations Association of
the National Capital Area to celebrate the signing of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Again this year, our Board has voted to
recognize someone who has worked to achieve the right to
representation in one's own government, one of the rights enumerated
by the Declaration. Our honoree this year, Ilir Zherka, is executive
director of DCVote. The luncheon ($30/person) will be held from noon
to 2 pm in the Caucus Room of the Russell Senate building. If you are
interested in joining the League table, call Kathy Schmidt at
237-5550.

National Program Planning: One of the challenging tasks
that lead up to the League's National Convention, to be held in DC,
June (dates needed) is reviewing LWVUS positions with a view to
recommending that they be retained, dropped or updated. As a
grassroots organization, the League does this in consultation with its
members; Unit Meetings on the subject are planned for January. Members
attending Units meeting in December are encouraged to identify the
"burning issues" that they want the LWVUS to address. — Sheila Keeny (966-1692),
3rd Vice President, National Program

December Units are traditionally Unit Choice meetings
with some units partaking of a holiday brunch and/or inviting a local
elected representative (DC Council, School Board, or other community
leader) to be a guest speaker. The Next Unit Council Meeting will be
held on Monday, December 8 at 12 Noon at the DC League office. Joan Domike (966-3865), Unit Director•

On November 6 the National Capital Planning Commission
held a public hearing relating to the proposal by Georgetown
University to build a boathouse just west of Key Bridge on a plot of
former parkland. Geri Albers and I joined several members of the
coalition "Defenders of the Potomac River Parkland" at the
hearing, and I presented a statement similar to the League statement
at the hearings of the D.C. Zoning Commission on May 19.

Our statement read, in part:

Without a doubt, the undeveloped area along the Potomac
River, west of Key Bridge., provides a valuable resource to our city
as open space in an urban setting. As the Georgetown Waterfront Park
& C&O Canal National Historic Park Plan states., "Above
Key Bridge is one of the main scenic treasures of the Nation's
Capital."

Because the League believes in full public review of
the environmental, social, and economic impacts of major developments
such as the proposed boathouse, we ask that an Environmental Impact
Statement be developed before plans for the boathouse proceed. The
1995 Environmental Assessment is outdated, and it was not an
assessment of the specific proposal before you. A new environmental
review is an appropriate means of addressing issues with full
opportunity for citizen participation.'...

After discussion, the NCPC Commissioners voted only to
approve the zoning approved by the DC Zoning Commission, referring
approval of the boathouse proposal back to the DC Zoning Commission --
Recognizing that the proposed boathouse would be 60% larger and 35%
taller than that allowed by the 1995 agreement between the National
Park Service and the DC State Historic Preservation Office.

Opponents urged consideration of alternative locations
for a Georgetown "Universal" Boathouse - open to all
university, high school, and boating programs. In that way, the first
new boathouse on the Georgetown waterfront would accommodate everyone
and be truly "Open Space", with open doors. — Frances Gemmill

Questions concerning League membership can be directed
to Linda Softli (667-8210) or Suzanne Campagna (338-1055).

Has your League Membership expired?

Please check the address label on the back page of the printed and
mailed version of this
issue. If the membership date above your name has passed, print
out the
renewal form and mail with your check (made payable to LWVDC).

Mr. Wells is meeting with various groups throughout the
city to provide information for citizens about the state of schools
and issues of concern. In our discussions, Mr. Wells used his time to
focus on the state of the schools and governance.

With D.C. having roughly 67,000 public school students,
Mr. Wells believes it is necessary for someone to speak up for the
parents all over the city as well as the approximate 5,000 teachers
and staff. He and others on the Board are concerned about the lack of
informed public discourse about D.C. Public Schools (DCPS). So often
what one hears is bad news. Mr. Wells is concerned that the case for
public charter schools and vouchers seems to be predicated on the
failure of public schools. Leaguers appreciate only too well that much
of the major print media too often focuses on the old saws of
"waste, fraud, and abuse" but with too little in terms of
more basic, edifying coverage. Mr. Wells pointed in contrast to the
civic partnership established by the Chicago Tribune in terms of
reporting to that community.

Too few know that D.C. has some of the highest
performing elementary and high schools in the U.S., per Newsweek.
Recognizably, we also have some of the lowest performing schools, thus
with low aggregate literacy and math scores. To consider improvements,
Mr. Wells believes we have to examine whether we have a system of
schools or a school system. He believes we have arrived at the former,
given variety embraced by charter and traditional schools, open
boundaries, private schools and entrepreneurial principals. It used to
be that the "customer" for one teacher would be the next
teacher ... can this child advance to the next grade. Now the customer
seems to be parents.

Throughout the U.S., including D.C., almost all the new
dollars are being devoted to special education and lowperforming
schools. Almost no urban school systems have gifted-and talented
programs. For his part, Mr. Wells has gone to bat for high performing
programs at Langdon elementary (Ward 5), which also has a Montessori
program within the school, resulting in a synergy that helps engage
parents. Further, the School Board has supported a multi-year
schooltransformation program. Now in the third year, special attention
has been paid to the 14 lowest performing schools. A fresh start was
made with all staff removed so that former as well as new teachers had
to apply. A city social worker has been provided for all those
schools, which takes the load from teachers. The tough measures taken
in cooperation with the union and key staff (principals,
vice-principals, and top management) are showing results. Mr. Wells
believes this effort is producing better results than an earlier,
alternative proposal (by the Mayor) to privatize twenty low-performing
schools with attendant restrictions on the DCPS budget.

The School Board, however, does have challenges, such
as how to translate the experience with Langdon as well as others,
such as the bilingual program at Oyster and the creative design for
new school buildings at Miner Elementary. Miner now has a waiting
list; the School Board had visited a variety of schools outside D.C.
before settling on the design, which has proved successful. When
looking at numerical comparisons with other jurisdictions, Mr. Wells
offered caution. For example, D.C. students average low SAT scores. We
should note that 77% of graduating seniors took the test. This high participation rate appears to affect unfavorably the
average D.C. test scores. Only 4 states (New York, New Jersey,
Connecticut and Massachusetts) have higher participation rates.

Turning to internal management, Mr. Wells recognized
that DCPS has mismanaged funds and that citizens should question what
is going on. The budget for the 2003-2004 fiscal year (FY) is the
first budget not inherited from the Control Board but drawn up by the
School Board. It is without a deficit but, obviously, if funds are
mismanaged later in the year, then the budget levels must be cut - the
later this occurs the harder it is to solve the problem. The Board's
goal is to keep teachers in the classroom, so candidates for any
cutting or freezing would be elsewhere.

The Board is now enforcing certain standing policies,
such as requiring teachers to be certified within three years of
employment. Last year 600 teachers did not achieve this and were let
go. Additionally, after eight years of neglect, requirements for
immunizations are being enforced, which also has benefit for the
health of community at large. Basics are being attended to, such as
knowing the number of people working for public schools.

Mr. Wells noted that special education has been a
terrible failure and eats up new monies. In terms of the percentage of
children with special needs, the District is not out of the ballpark
with 17% (Boston at 20%, Baltimore at 16 % and New Orleans at 17%).
However, D.C. has a high number of court cases involving special
needs, resulting in a high number of private placements. Annual
funding level is about $170 million. Of this around $60 million is for
busing special-needs kids and about $15 million for attorney fees. Two
hundred children are in private placement and none of these were
placed under negotiated contracts. Fees for evaluations have been
exorbitant; however now they are subject to market rates. Last year $13 million for special education came
from the tobacco settlement for DCPS. This was used for increasing
capacity in D.C., adding 500 desks to the existing 200. The Board has
brought in consultants DC Appleseed Center to evaluate the
special-education hearing process. D.C. has more parents' requests for
hearings than any other city in the country. The Board supports giving higher priority to special
education in DCPS, e.g., someone reporting directly to the
Superintendent. There will be a new approach to evaluating principals
and not by test scores alone. Ten to twenty percent of a rating will
be determined by the number of hearing requests by parents in that
school. This will reveal cases to the Board, which previously never
heard of problems.

The Q&A session explored various issues. With
respect to having a "vanguard system" (relating to early
childhood reading), Mr. Wells thinks D.C. seems to have too many
systems already. The costs for implementing the federally, required No
Child Left Behind act is on the order of $15-20 million, but we will
be getting less than half from the federal government (about $9
million). Congress has mandated a new school for severely limited
children, to be built on D.C. General Hospital land and has provided
$3 million. The students will be from D.C. but the school will be
private. The opportunity to consider applying $3 million to the two
D.C. schools relevant to the needs was not an option for the District.

Mr. Wells found it daunting to run in two wards,
especially since he drew the short term when the hybrid
elected/appointed School Board was established. He had to become known
to and know about 25 percent of the city. Substantive press coverage
of candidate views could have been a lot better. The position of
School Board Member is now part-time and pays $15,000 per year (down
from $30,000). Yet Mr. Wells has to be concerned with 40 schools, 40
PTA's, and school buildings with an average age of 65 years. The Board
is supposed to stick to policy, but operational problems seem to
necessitate Board involvement.

With regard to the hybrid Board (combining five elected
members, an elected President, and four members appointed by the
Mayor), it has been difficult for this Board to develop a sense of
common purpose. Although some extremely talented people have been
appointed to the Board, appointed members do not appear to feel the
same relationship to the community they serve, as do the elected
members. This has been reflected in their lower attendance at the four
Board meetings required to be held each year in the community. On the
other hand, appointed Board members have been willing to "call a
spade a spade" when deliberating on the Mayor's budget this year
for teachers' raises, and being willing to invoke a provision
subjecting raises to the availability of funds. (That area of funding
had seen a $31 million one-year jump and was set to receive over $40
million this year. But this contrasts with the $5 million increase in
the Mayor's budget for DCPS.)

As to continuing the present hybrid arrangement or
changing it, Mr. Wells believes this must be pursued through full
community dialogue. He does believe that it is better when a Board
elects its own president because then they are accountable for working
with that person. He urged that the debate not turn on short-term
issues like personalities.

Other concerns expressed in the Q&A session
included:

Availability of space for charter
schools - - There are schools half filled, which suggests that DCPS
could be more flexible. Mr. Wells thinks there should be a more
neutral body to make decisions on allocating space. One possibility
would be a commission, with representation from the School Board, the
Chartering Authority, Mayor, Superintendent, and a DC resident
appointed by the Mayor and approved by the Council.

Fighting for academic excellence
apart from the dollars - -- Former Board Member Erika Landsberg's
group, DC Voice, is working on academic improvement but Mr. Wells
would like to see more parent groups so concerned. The plans for
technical programs at a renovated McKinley High School will help
expand educational opportunities relevant for jobs, but the project
will tie up $7 million in a tight budget climate.

The desirability and
practicability of changing the DCPS fiscal year (FY) - - Mr. Wells
noted also the need to take account of when funds are actually
appropriated and made available to DCPS. Actually, DCPS received
authority to spend FY2004 dollars this past year, but Mr. Gandhi
determines how much and when. DCPS cannot carry over prior FY dollars,
so there is a balancing act to use all of FY 2003 monies before the
new FY. (Any carry over reverts to the District, not DCPS.)